Bernie did an hour long town hall at the beginning of his campaign explaining exactly what democratic socialism means to him (which is essentially the bare minimum of public policies existing in every other industrialized country) but apparently according to ABC we basically have to install the Khmer Rouge regime first to give people healthcare. FOH

Thank you for reply. But the point is that she has actually already cosponsored Bernie's bill (just like Kamala) but now is rushing out her separate plans and only talks in vague generic language about it. She even put out a recent tweet using the term "access to healthcare".

"Of course, we say it's our land, the Torah says it, but they (Palestinians & Arabs) don't believe in the Torah. So that's the reason there is not peace. They invent other reasons, but they do not believe in a Jewish state and that is why we, in America, must stand strong with Israel through thick and thin." - Schumer at AIPAC 2018

If it is he who initiated the call, like what the fuck could he possibly have said to them? Uhh Jamie, look, the economy, as you know we have the best economy. Just don't do the thing you guys did when the black guy was president, remember?

Hi Lara I just want to know how much you agree with Nixon's conservative Chief Justice Warren E. Burger?

WEB: If I were writing the Bill of Rights now, there wouldn’t be any such thing as the Second Amendment —

Interviewer: Which says?

WEB: That a well-regulated militia being necessary for the defense of the state, the peoples’ rights to bear arms. This has been the subject of one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word fraud, on the American public by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime.

Now just look at those words. There are only three lines to that amendment: “A well-regulated militia.” If the militia, which was going to be the state army, was going to be well regulated, why shouldn’t 16, 17, and 18, or any other age persons be regulated in the use of arms, the way an automobile is regulated?

There must be in-groups whom the law protectes but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.

There is nothing more or else to it, and there never has been, in any place or time.

For millenia, conservatism had no name, because no other model of polity had ever been proposed. “The king can do no wrong.” In practice, this immunity was always extended to the king’s friends, however fungible a group they might have been.

As the core proposition of conservatism is indefensible if stated baldly, it has always been surrounded by an elaborate backwash of pseudophilosophy, amounting over time to millions of pages. All such is axiomatically dishonest and undeserving of serious scrutiny. Today, the accelerating de-education of humanity has reached a point where the market for pseudophilosophy is vanishing; it is, as The Kids Say These Days, tl;dr . All that is left is the core proposition itself — backed up, no longer by misdirection and sophistry, but by violence.